Legal Opinion

American Bank v. Port Orford Cedar Products Co.

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided June 28, 1932PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBean, C. J.

It is contended on behalf of the defendant that, it having once paid the amount of the trade acceptances to the stockholders, defendant should not be required to pay the same again for the reason that it had not been disclosed, either by the books or by the plaintiff bank, so as to decrease the net value of the price of the assets. Defendant asserts:

“If a transfer of corporate property and assets is made in good faith and for a proper consideration, the purchaser acquires the property and franchises free from any liability for the debts of the transferring corporation.” 14a C. J. 892, § 3069.…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Bramwell v. RowlandOregon Supreme Court · 1927
  2. Williams v. Commercial National BankOregon Supreme Court · 1907
  3. Gantenbein v. BowlesOregon Supreme Court · 1922
  4. Macbeth v. BanfieldOregon Supreme Court · 1904
  5. Umpqua Valley Bank v. WilsonOregon Supreme Court · 1926

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Nelson v. Pampered Beef-Midwest, Inc.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1980
  2. Dairy Co-Operative Ass'n v. Brandes CreameryOregon Supreme Court · 1934
  3. Realty Associates v. Women's ClubOregon Supreme Court · 1962
  4. Meikle v. Export Lumber Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1933
  5. Bly v. Travellers' Insurance Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1933

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API